Just curious, is there any reason why this load would/wouldn't work from a terminal ballistics perspective (lets say against a 2 legged threat, not a wild boar, bears, elephants, or w/e)? I realize it is "unproven" and the reasoning behind buck and ball is more than antiquated (from days of muzzleloaders due to people firing in lines/ranks), but intuition tells me that it should perform at least fairly well:
- Small "slug" - roughly similar effects as a regular slug, the reduced mass probably leads to less penetration, but it's not like slugs can't penetrating enough in the first place.
- 6 #1 buck - far as I know, #1 buck is a pretty good load for self defense. potentially better than #00 due to a higher sectional density while providing sufficient penetration. if anything, i imagine its better than nothing.
- Therefore I imagine that slug + buck at the same time > just slug or just buck.
Again I am simply wondering about the technical aspect of this load. This is all assuming that this stuff already patterns well in the gun, is going to be used in an appropriate situation/setting and load consideration has already been done, it cycles reliably, legally safe, etc. etc.

Comment